How can I learn to write atonal music?

I want to ask the question that was suggested in another thread because I think it's important. The question is: How should an inexperienced composer who wants to write dissonant and rhythmically complex music learn how to do that?

I've been writing and playing music a long time but I'm basically a beginner at 'classical' composition. I can read score at an intermediate level. I know basic theory and have some experience with extended harmony and odd time signatures and syncopation. I can write four part harmony and I have a basic understanding of counterpoint. I haven't spent much time on orchestration. I do spend time studying scores and listening to a variety of composers. I can write basic pieces that mimic (poorly) composers of the baroque and classical period.

So my question is: What else should I be doing, what is the next step? I don't post music here because lately I haven't much time to write anything; and to be honest, the level of bickering and personal attacks on this site in the past at least makes me think that it is a waste of time.

Atonal music is a huge category! I think the best way for you to start is listen to several atonal pieces and find one that appeals to you. Maybe you already have several favorites? All of the following are atonal, but each is very different in many ways. You could start by deciding what you like or dislike about these pieces and then you'd know better what kind of research and analysis would be good for you, and where you might start.

I'm listing some of my favorites - they might not appeal to you at all!

Density 21.5 was written by Edgar Varese in 1936 and revised in 1946. The title refers to the density of a platinum flute. Most flutes prior to this time were silver or gold, and this piece was especially written to show off this particular flute. I always enjoy solo flute music and this one especially shows how to create wonderful contours, uses repeated motifs, gives us a good combination of cohesion and contrast - all without any harmonic implications. By the way, Emmanuel Pahud may be the greatest flutist alive today - at least in my book!

Here's what I think is one of the most gorgeous pieces written in the 20th century. Messiaen wrote this as he was dying, and said that he was hearing the music "of the beyond". Messiaen seemed to have a direct connection with the Divine, so I believe him! I was thrilled to learn that heavenly music isn't major or minor chords, doesn't use functional harmony, has no catchy rhythms - it's just pure beauty. Messiaen walked a fine line between tonal and atonal, and used his own modes of limited transposition rather than major/minor scales. He said music must speak to us and must be beautiful - he didn't like labels or differentiation of types of music.

Perhaps my favorite piece of atonal music actually combines serialism and Bach. The weaving is seamless and haunting, and to me brings out the best of both styles. Alban Berg's Violin Concerto is in 4 sections, with no break between them. I'm only including the last section, where Bach's chorale "Es ist genug" (It is enough!) speaks to us in a 20th century voice.

Here's the Bach chorale:

And here's the Berg concerto, starting just before the 4th (last) section:

If none of these pieces speak to you, pick your own favorite atonal piece and start learning what makes it tick. There are books, one very excellent one (but expensive) but until you've listened and fallen in love with a special piece, the books will feel like gibberish.

Get really conversant with tonal music until you learn how to bend it to your liking, that's advice I've seen a few times. If your pieces are basic, get them better with continued practice before venturing into atonality.

Julie, thank you for some wonderful examples! Yes, atonality in general is too wide a scope as you have proven with the variety of your choices, none of which has the slam-bang harshness that we associate with 'atonal'. I used that term in my title partly because it was mentioned in the other thread and I wanted to continue that discussion.

The Varese is kind of improvisational, how could he hear that loose yet lyrical and spontaneous quality and get it down on paper, amazing. The Messiaen is gentle and hypnotic, again not what you might expect of atonality, but as you say no typical progression when you listen for that. The Berg is a great concept but I will have to study that for a long time I think. All three of these do speak to me.

A good and fun way to start your exploration might be to create a tone row, which is a melody that uses each of the 12 notes of the scale exactly once. From that, you can create 3 other rows, 1) an inversion (the melody played upside down), 2) a retrograde (the melody played backwards), and 3) a retrograde inversion (the melody played backwards and upside down). It can produce some surprising results which may inspire you to add harmony or play around with it in interesting ways.

Good idea to start a neutral thread, Ingo. I don't know the first thing about proper atonal composition so I can't contribute any quality answers to this thread. But here are concepts I've either stumbled across or wondered about but unfortunately, I am not sure exactly what all they encompass. I hope others will shed more light on these topics which might give you (and anyone else) some tools/knowledge to start with.

1) Atonal Palette.

I'm sure this includes the tone rows Gav mentioned. I am assuming it also could include any predefined finite set of sounds which might include quartertones, extended technique sounds, notes of a non-western scale, etc. (I assume these sets are used in lieu of traditional scales).

2) Compositional Structure/Form.

Not sure if there are special forms for atonal music. I mention this because it would be a useful thing to know even just for more thoroughly appreciating atonal music.

3) Compositional Similarities to Tonal Music

It seems that motifs and repetition would fall under this category. Development might also belong here. Perhaps others can add more or correct me if I'm wrong.

4) Compositional Differences from Tonal Music

Movements and resolves. Hopefully others could cover some techniques for dealing with these concepts in the absence of a pitch hierarchy.

Great idea Gav, I like that. The advantage is the piece sort of writes itself which appeals to my laziness for sure. Seriously though, that would give me a good starting point.

It's interesting that a set of "rules" evolved from Schoenberg's atonal pieces, he broke old rules to make new ones I guess.

Gav Brown said:

Hi Ingo,

A good and fun way to start your exploration might be to create a tone row, which is a melody that uses each of the 12 notes of the scale exactly once. From that, you can create 3 other rows, 1) an inversion (the melody played upside down), 2) a retrograde (the melody played backwards), and 3) a retrograde inversion (the melody played backwards and upside down). It can produce some surprising results which may inspire you to add harmony or play around with it in interesting ways.

I think you've given us a quality answer MM, thank you for that. Dave mentioned getting good at tonal music and then expanding on that which is kind of what you are saying too I think, in that the general principles of conventional composition will still apply at some point to anything that we write, even if we vary one aspect like the amount of dissonance and the treatment of that, we still have to give our listeners some sign posts to follow our path.

I like to think of it as a conversation. If I'm talking just to hear myself speak then I can blabber anything I want (I try and limit that!) but if I'm speaking to someone else or maybe even a lot of people I need to make my ideas clear in order to communicate with others. Easier said than done for me at least.

MM Coston said:

Good idea to start a neutral thread, Ingo. I don't know the first thing about proper atonal composition so I can't contribute any quality answers to this thread. But here are concepts I've either stumbled across or wondered about but unfortunately, I am not sure exactly what all they encompass. I hope others will shed more light on these topics which might give you (and anyone else) some tools/knowledge to start with.

1) Atonal Palette.

I'm sure this includes the tone rows Gav mentioned. I am assuming it also could include any predefined finite set of sounds which might include quartertones, extended technique sounds, notes of a non-western scale, etc. (I assume these sets are used in lieu of traditional scales).

2) Compositional Structure/Form.

Not sure if there are special forms for atonal music. I mention this because it would be a useful thing to know even just for more thoroughly appreciating atonal music.

3) Compositional Similarities to Tonal Music

It seems that motifs and repetition would fall under this category. Development might also belong here. Perhaps others can add more or correct me if I'm wrong.

4) Compositional Differences from Tonal Music

Movements and resolves. Hopefully others could cover some techniques for dealing with these concepts in the absence of a pitch hierarchy.

I agree with Messiaen that music should not be differentiated into various forms. which is why atonalism, in separating itself from harmony becomes minimalism. By ejecting harmony from music atonalism is eliminating a large part of the musical vocabulary and the emotion which harmony evokes. The Messiaen piece you have posted demonstrates a marriage between atonalism and tonal harmony. It is a tonal melody played over an atonal and dissonant orchestration. The emotion evoked is one of wonder, longing, eeriness, and awe.

The Berg concerto, by remaining dissonant throughout dwells on but one emotion, tension, and or stress which remains unresolved to the end. Bach on the other hand produces an immediate emotion of ahhh, relaxation, glory. (Actually there is some stress in the choir voices as in falsetto singing. In this computer age someone needs to write all the baroque era vocals down a step so they will sound like Bach intended them to sound before pitch inflation.)

Regarding Messiaen receiving some divine inspiration: The few people who have gone to heaven and returned have commented on how beautiful the music is. They are common people who have had no music training, It is doubtful that they would have called the heavenly music beautiful had it sounded like Varese or Berg. Heavenly music probably sounds more like Bach.

Ingo,

Take Messiaen's advice. Make your music beautiful by employing the amount of dissonance necessary to evoke the desired emotion. Atonalism, fugetaboutit.

To me music is a branch of physics. The laws of physics apply all the time and in all places of the universe. You can't eliminate or ignore one law of physics in favor of another just because you are not fond of a particular law. So it is not practical to eliminate much of the structure of music (tonal harmony) in favor of dissonance and still produce good music.

To me music is a branch of physics. The laws of physics apply all the time and in all places of the universe. You can't eliminate or ignore one law of physics in favor of another just because you are not fond of a particular law. So it is not practical to eliminate much of the structure of music (tonal harmony) in favor of dissonance and still produce good music.

Hi Lawrence,

More dissonant intervals occur higher up in the harmonic series and so using your Platonic logic, utilising these intervals for creative ends should also be a valid expression should it not? You might not be fond of atonality and its laws, but some of the greatest musical minds of the last 100 years or so have been and continue to be so. The implication that atonality or dissonance is structureless is also unfounded. In fact a lot of atonal music is highly organised, sometimes out of necessity, so perhaps you could say on what basis you came to this conclusion.

I see a parallel between expanding tonality into atonality and advances in other areas of human endeavour, especially the technical sciences. It is in our nature to attempt to overcome natural laws and we are clearly inherently capable of such feats. I personally believe our species art is a result of our rage and emotional recoil against the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

btw, some physicists aren't sure that the laws are all- encompassing across the universe. They might be local conditions and vary in different regions of space and if the multiverse is real, then the laws might just be one permutation in an infinity of endless combinations...sounds like an atonal creed to me.